Leaked first Banjo and Kazooie 3 screenshots


Recommended Posts

Well in the mean time..

Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts Q&A

13-May-2008 Exclusive: Rare takes Banjo in a new direction

Banjo-Kazooie 3 is up there with Gears of War 2 as far as 360's monster games of 2008 go for us. We've seen a bit about Gears 2 already, and now Rare's finally lifted the cauldron lid on Banjo's third adventure.

To get an idea on what we can expect, and how the chance in direction came about, we scored a very exclusive interview with Rare's head of design, Gregg Mayles, who was on the team of the very first Banjo game all those years ago.

CVG: So Banjo's been out of the limelight for a while now. What's he been up to?

Gregg Mayles: He's been slobbing out. As you'll see in the storyline, Banjo's no longer his slim, fit self and he's been in retirement and gone to seed. He's in retirement, Grunty is just a head so you think these two are never going to star in another game ever. But we'll bring them back to life and, as you see, Grunty gets a mechanical body, Banjo will be reformed to his formal self and off they go again on another adventure.

CVG: Last time you made a Banjo game you were under Nintendo's wing. Now you're in bed with Microsoft. What's the difference?

Mayles: In terms of our thinking behind the Banjo game, zero. We consciously have made no decisions because it's for a different company. Obviously we've got the use of multiplayer this time, which - although in Banjo-Tooie we did explore it to a certain degree, we certainly couldn't do half the stuff we've got planned for multiplayer this time.

I guess that's really the only difference. Everything is much the same. The humour's the same, the characters are the same, the feel of the game.

CVG: What's been the reaction to the game outside of Rare so far?

Mayles: People have grasped it a lot quicker than we thought. We thought there might be some kind of, 'This isn't Banjo any more, what's going on?' But this hasn't proved to be the case. People can see what we've done and how we're trying to approach the platform genre in a slightly different way.

The traditional Banjo game was like, 'here's a character, we'll give you some moves but they're fixed abilities, and you use those fixed abilities to try and discover the solution to a designed problem.'

[in the new game] we're giving you a load of abilities, and you're able to combine those abilities however you feel will solve the problem. So rather than it being a case of trying to find the designer's way of doing it, maybe you can find your own way of doing it. I guess that, in a nutshell, is really what the game is, just having the freedom of trying to find your own way of doing things rather than what we tell you.

Continues..

Hands on from Wired

Heh.

CVG: How do you think the Banjo hardcore will react to the changes?

Mayles: I think the generation of players that have played Banjo before are probably going to be shocked to start with. They're probably going to look at it and say, 'Hang on a sec, this isn't the Banjo I was expecting. What have you done? You've ruined it!'

I had that reaction when I first saw the emphasis on vehicles, but I'm now looking at it with an open mind, and it does look like it'll be a great game.

-Spenser

I can't help but feel extremely disappointed with what was shown today. The most obvious thing is the vehicles. Where the **** do vehicles fit in? I just wanted simple platformer in similar style to the original games. I'm one of those people who get really bored in large worlds really quickly. While the idea of having a massive landscape to explore sounds great, I much prefer a simpler but not necessarily linear style of gameplay - smaller levels, clear goals.

Given that Banjo was one of the major reasons why I chose 360 over a PS3 back in January I can't help but feel slapped in the face.

Banjo 3 was my most anticipated game this year, now I don't think I'll even buy it. Still might be a good game, just nothing at all like what I was looking for. I agree with chAos972 here.

I do think that people that liked Viva Pinata would like this, I was not one of them however. Loved Kameo though.

The people bitching about the graphics.

Joe_And_Mac_SNES_ScreenShot3.jpg

compared to that I Think they look damn good.

Oh no you didn't warwagon! :D

That is the SNES game (one of my favorites) that I always forget the name. Please tell!

Edit: Joe and Mac? (Looked closer into the picture). :p

I can't believe they're pushing the build your own vehicles feature. They've removed Banjos moves and replaced them with the ability to build vehicles. Nintendo changed the Mario formula slightly and it worked really well because at the end of the day it was still a platformer. Rare have changed the Banjo formula that it doesn't look like a platformer anymore. Not looking forward to it at all now.

The hands-on impression on Kotaku sounds like it's now different to the old Banjo Kazooie gameplay and now made it more about vehicles. As a fan of the original, i don't really like the idea.

I read that this morning as well and this quote sums up my disappointment;

Early impressions leave a lot to be desired and more than one person who saw the game asked the developers on hand if these single player challenges and vehicle creation was all there was to the game.

The reply: "Creating vehicles to complete the challenges is the crux of the game." Kotaku

You guys should be more open minded. I was a little sad at first, but then I thought about it a bit and I'll give it a good shot. Rare made the other choice with Banjo-Tooie (to just recreate Banjo-Kazooie with new levels and better looks) and I didn't think it was as fun as the original, so I guess a third of the same probably wouldn't have done anything for me.

X3F Impressions - Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts

bkdsci0017.jpg

Alright fanboys, time to get the difficult news out of the way first. Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts is not much like its predecessors at all. The main gameplay focus is still on platforming, only it's now platforming with vehicles too. Like most platformers, the specific objectives you have to complete are slightly varied, but are mostly different takes on collecting items.

To do so, you'll have a massive tool kit at your fingertips. The vehicles seen in the gallery can all be broken down into various pieces, and a large portion of the gameplay stems from mixing and matching vehicle parts to suit the task at hand. Or y'know, to just suit messing around with infinitely customizable vehicles in a physics playground. That playground can be taken online as well, and the game's multiplayer is very physics-focused and custom-content heavy.

bkdsci0018.jpg

The more traditional platforming elements of the series' history come to the surface in the game's overworld, Showdown town, and there the player will use more jumping and on-foot platforming than in the other levels. The half dozen levels are really big, incredibly colorful and creative, and seem to be designed to offer as much variety as the theme allows.

To traverse the levels, you'll use custom created vehicles, assembled in the game's garage, or reconfigured "in the field." The vehicle creation mechanic utilizes a 3D area of invisible cubic spaces, and a standard building block is the size of a single cube. This single cube then becomes the standard unit of measurement and movement for the assembly of the vehicle. While there are many pieces that do not conform to the shape of the unit cube, when they move their "attachment axis" does so along the invisible grid.

bkdsci0019.jpg

The system definitely doesn't over-complicate things, and with a few mandatory pieces (power, propulsion, seat, etc) that don't even need to be in contact, you'll be on your way. The garage has a limit on the specific amount of each type of part that can be used, which serves to provide a modicum of balance. From what we saw, the types of pieces, freedom to combine them, and ability for the changes to be visible immediately in both a gameplay and graphical sense could lead to endless emergent gameplay.

While many will decry the change, we could see ourselves spending many hours creating vehicles and experimenting with how they effect the world and vice versa. In a memorable moment, we walked up behind a fellow attendee who appeared to be piloting some sort of submarine (as the vehicle was underwater) when suddenly he pulled up and the thing pointed to the clouds and took off into the sky. It was really impressive until he ran out of fuel and hit the ground, where the vehicle exploded into all of its component pieces.

bkdsci0020.jpg

The beauty of the game is that if one was dedicated enough they could retrieve all the pieces and rebuild the vehicle without ever entering the garage. The garage of course facilitates all the new additions to the vehicle, so any in-world editing is limited to the pieces already in-world. But there will be items to be found only in-world as well, and the in-world items can end up playing a crucial role in the multiplayer.

The Rare folks were only showcasing a single multiplayer gametype that they were calling Sumo, which is essentially a variant of King of the Hill. Using custom vehicles, four players play bumper cars within a specific area, trying to force everyone else out. Oh, and did we mention that the building pieces include weapons of all sorts, creating even more gameplay options. While an objective-based mode was what was shown, it will likely be the simple physics based interactions of free-form play that will be the most appealing to people.

bkdsci0021.jpg

Unfortunately, much of the game is still under wraps or unfinished, and the full extent of the feature set is still to be determined. After creating a particularly fun plane, we inquired about the possibility of sharing our creation with others online and a wry smile crossed the PR woman's face and she said, "We can't talk about that." So take that for what you will.

All in all there is a good reason that Rare did not decide to title the game Banjo Threeie. It's something new. Sure you could argue that Banjo and Kazooie are both superfluous now, but their design and history flavor the world and story. Besides there still is traditional platforming in the game. But in a similar fashion to the platforming genre at large, the more traditional stuff is hidden inside the larger gameplay genres that have been created. Whether Rare should have made Banjo Threeie isn't important. They made Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts, and its going new places and trying new things.

Source - X360F

-Spenser

Consider me disappointed.

Another screw up from Rare.

Sad indeed :(

Alot of games sound bad in theory but rock when played. RARE are able to deliver great games. Theres no point saying its screwed and will suck ass before we've had our own chance of a hands on.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • All these CEOs got the biggest boners thinking about firing employees for AI. Turned out it was just a wet dream.
    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!